NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- There are only about 1,500 hours to go before Election Day. And that's also about how many times you'll hear snappy sound bites about the economic proposals of John McCain and Barack Obama.
Over the next nine weeks, CNNMoney.com will help you sort through the claims. We'll try to sort fact from fiction and truth from exaggeration - or just clue you in on what the candidates are really talking about.
The first part in the series: Just how much tax relief is McCain offering?
The claim: To hear Obama tell it, McCain isn't proposing "one penny of tax relief to more than 100 million Americans."
The Obama campaign says it bases that number on one of McCain's tax proposals - to increase the exemption filers take for dependents - and adds that it is the "only middle-class tax cut" the Republican nominee has offered.
The top line: It depends on what you mean by tax relief and what you mean by "only." But Obama's claim isn't as far-fetched as it sounds, keeping in mind that projections about tax effects are not carved in stone.
The facts: McCain has made several tax proposals. One of them is the dependent exemption increase.
Obama gets to his "more than 100 million" charge primarily from an analysis that two Harvard researchers did for the campaign. They examined 2004 tax return data from the IRS and estimated that 101 million tax returns would not benefit from the increase to the exemption in 2009. That represents more than 140 million people. The Obama campaign claims that number is actually low because the data did not include non-filers.
The Tax Foundation, a group unaffiliated with the Obama campaign, reached a similar conclusion.
So which Americans would see no benefit from McCain's proposal? People without dependents, of course, and those who don't make enough money to file or to owe enough federal income tax to benefit fully from the exemption.
At the same time, theObama camp is pushing it when it claims that the exemption increase is the "only" middle class tax break McCain offers.
Douglas Holtz-Eakin, McCain's senior economic adviser, said some of the folks who don't get a break from the dependent exemption could benefit from McCain's proposal to change how money spent on health insurance is taxed.
Today, if you buy a policy on your own, you don't get any tax break. If your employer subsidizes your premiums, that money is considered tax-free to you.
Under McCain's plan, that subsidy would become taxable income. But anyone who buys insurance would receive a refundable tax credit worth $2,500 per person ($5,000 per family). That's a dollar-for-dollar reduction of your tax bill, or, if you don't have a tax bill, a dollar-for-dollar increase in the amount of money Uncle Sam would send your way.
Certainly, the health care credit would provide a new tax break for anyone who buys insurance on their own. Whether the credit would be a boon for those who get insurance through their employer depends, among other things, on the cost of their plans, the amount their employer contributes and their income tax rate.
Holtz-Eakin also said that some of the households without dependents could get tax relief because of McCain's proposal to permanently "patch" the Alternative Minimum Tax. The so-called wealth tax, left unaddressed, would hit an increasing number of middle- and upper-middle-income families. While Congress has been patching the AMT every year, McCain's proposal would be more of a super-patch.
The Republican nominee has also proposed to make permanent the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, which would otherwise expire by 2011. Even critics of those cuts, however, expect lawmakers to keep many in place.
The bottom line: It's not fair to say that McCain's dependent exemption proposal is his "only middle-class tax cut." But Obama's claim that "more than 100 million Americans" will be left out of tax relief under McCain seems to be in the ballpark.
When the Tax Policy Center, which has analyzed both candidates' tax plans,considered McCain's proposals as a whole minus his health care plan, it estimated that 66 million tax "units" - or 78 million people - would still not see tax relief next year. Add their kids and Cousin Itt upstairs, and you get closer to that 100 million number Obama touts.
But one caveat: The numbers are expected to fall once researchers incorporate the effects of McCain's health care credit, which they expect to do in the coming weeks.
It's a Fitzy video blowout bonanza over at townienews. com! Why in the past week alone we've released such GFY gems as...
Fitzy's Visit to Yankee Stadium on the day of the final Sox/Yanks game,,,
Plus the brand-spanking new Week 1 installment of Fitzy's FANalyst Funspot for all your deranged fantasy football freaks...
And the best part is Pats season hasn't even kicked off, and the Sox are stretch running for the pennant on pure Pedroia power. Good times, peoples. GOOD FAHKIN' TIMES!
Enjoy the videos! Keep in touch! Go Sox! Go Pats! GFY!
Since the advent of the automobile, there have always been those among us who feel the need to take the design of a vehicle and go a step further. Some do it for speed, some for handling, and some simply for style.
For many auto enthusiasts, their ride is an extension of their own personality – a window into their soul. And that’s where things can get a bit dodgy. Some people, well… their souls just weren’t that well thought-out.
The result? Neon underglows, rhinestone’d mud flaps, and spinners, to name a few. So think of this as a public service announcement...here are the 7 worst ways to modify your car.
7. Truck Nutz
They say a picture is worth a thousand words, but in this case, I think that’s severely underrated. Beyond serving no purpose other than to announce your maverick defiance against anything which could be even remotely considered good taste, these fake ball sacks are actually illegal in some states now.
Even though it probably has more do to with a collective freak-out by the morality police, I like to think the law is something more along the lines of a situation where the government felt they had to intervene to save a moronic populace from themselves. Git’er done!
6. Fake Chrome
Ok, I like chrome. I really do. To gaze upon a 1959 Cadillac Coupe De Ville is to understand the meaning of beauty.
But, just because a 59 Caddy has a metric ass-ton of chrome (which suits it quite well), it does not mean your 1998 Chevy Tahoe is going to look sharp with stick-on strips of fake chrome accentuating every gap between the body panels. How is this aesthetically pleasing to anyone? Or is this a clever trick – are we supposed to think your car is swank because you bought some fake chrome pieces at Pep Boys? Kid, I’m insulted.
Maybe it’s an addiction. Maybe you start out simple, something like this. Before you know it, your car is covered roof to wheels in faux shiny bits. Maybe you know it looks god awful at this point, but you’ve invested so much time and money into the project, your brain refuses to accept such a result. That’s ok, because I have no problem reminding you. Your fake chrome looks whack.
5. Blow-off Valves
Ok, so you saw one particular movie about a particular street racing trend in the late 90s and bought your turbo Sentra a blow off valve. Initially, you thought to yourself, “Sweet, my 110hp econobox sounds like a jet fighter!.” Couple of days later, while rowing through the gears in stop and go traffic, you realized that maybe the loud hiss created by releasing compressed air isn’t the most pleasant sound to hear 5000 times during rush hour. Well, at least it’s giving you some help in the performance department, right? Wrong.
4. Putting a Race Clutch in Your 200hp Daily Driver
Ok, so you bought a bone-stock ’89 Mustang. You went straight to work on it - bought a pair of Flowmasters, and a K&N CAI. Where do you go from here? Well, if you’re anything like the previous owners of the two Mustangs I’ve had, you apparently go straight for the heaviest, least practical clutch you can find.
Take, for instance, the King Cobra clutch. Rated for drivetrains making in excess of 450hp, you’ve just put one on a car that makes 220. Did it make the car faster? No. Did it make your left leg cramp up in traffic and make driving your car a physically taxing endeavor every time you got behind the wheel? Yes.
Next time, avoid trying to fool yourself into thinking you’re driving a McLaren F1 and use a clutch that doesn’t require both feet to fully engage. You’ll just end up wearing this clutch out prematurely from lazy shifts anyway.
3. Cheap Exhaust Systems
Along with cold air intakes, an aftermarket exhaust system is one of the first modifications any self-respecting hot rodder will undertake. Not only does a less restrictive exhaust system free up some horsepower and torque (sometimes) it also lets more of the engine’s natural tone resonate throughout the land.
Sometimes, however, this isn’t a good thing. Sometimes, it makes your car sounds like a swarm of drugged bees being shot out of the ass of an elephant.
The bottom line here is, if you buy a cheap exhaust system, your car is going to sound like ass. Doesn’t matter if it’s an '85 Yugo GV or a Ferrari F430. Save a little longer and spend those hard-earned duckets on a decent muffler. Everyone will thank you.
2. Wings
Amongst all the negative hallmarks of the tuner trend that defined a “rice rocket”, this might be the most immediately recognizable. The idea behind a wing or a spoiler is that it creates downforce, which keeps the back end of the car from hydroplaning at (very) high speeds.
The concept of a wing is not an entirely bad one by any means. For instance, if you look at a Porsche 911, you’ll notice that a small spoiler comes up from the body of the car at speeds above around 60mph or so. Porsche considers this adequate downforce for a car which can reach speeds in excess of 190mph.
However, a Toyota Tercel does not reach speeds in excess of 110mph. Because of that sad fact, it really needs no wing at all, much less a large one, or two large ones. All you're really doing is adding weight, and in turn slowing your car down.
This is the automotive equivalent of having “I’m an asshat” tattooed on your forehead.
1. DIY Suspension Lowering
The “slammed” look has been the hot ticket for a while now. It’s simple way to take your otherwise stock car and add a healthy dose of sex appeal and sportiness. Lowering a car puts the center of gravity, well…, lower, allowing the car to handle better and (assuming it’s done properly) experience less body roll through the curves.
However, far more often than not, this is not done properly. Many modders will simply buy a set of the most aggressive springs they can find and slap them on, figuring the job is done. Unfortunately, you have just introduced a vast array of problems to your car.
We'll start with bump steer. Since you’ve lowered the springs, but left the rest of the suspension alone, all the other parts are still configured to be used with springs taller than the ones on there now. So, when you hit a bump in the road now, you better be holding the wheel pretty tight, because you’re about to experience bump steer. When the wheel hits a large bump, pothole, or even a groove in the road, your car will now steer in the direction of that road surface, hence steering your car without your consent. Really fun on a freeway off ramp, let me tell you. Bump steer sucks, and it’s totally dangerous. But let’s assume you don’t mind that.
Let’s say instead, you didn’t even buy any springs. Couldn’t afford ‘em! Instead, you heard about cutting the existing springs to lower your car. Hey, great idea – doesn’t cost you a dime! But here’s what you didn’t expect – those springs are no longer springs now. They’re solid pieces of metal shaped like springs. What’s that mean, you say? It means you no longer have a functioning suspension system. You hit a bump and nothing absorbs it whatsoever.
This is why you see those cars on the freeway constantly bouncing up and down. As bad as it looks from the outside, it’s far, far worse inside a car setup like that. Trust me, they’ve learned their lesson. Hopefully, you have too.
You see people, the companies designing these cars have engineered them the way they did for a reason. It’s a safe bet they know what they’re doing.
Now, go buy a bone-stock Evo and learn how to drive it.
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Falling gasoline prices were not enough to revive sales of SUVs and pickups in August as Ford Motor reported a sharp fall in sales once again, and warned that even tougher times are ahead for the rest of the year.
Ford (F, Fortune 500) reported U.S. auto sales fell 27% in the month compared to a year earlier -- far worse than the forecast of a 16% tumble in sales from auto sales tracker Edmunds.com.
Sales of Ford's pickup and van models tumbled 39% while sales of SUVs plunged 53%.
Even sales of cars, which are typically more fuel efficient than light trucks, fell 9% in August.
Year-to-date, sales at Ford have fallen 16%. And the automaker suggested that it doesn't see any signs of a quick turnaround.
"We expect the second half of 2008 will be more challenging than the first half, as weak economic conditions and the consumer credit crunch continues," said Jim Farley, group vice president of marketing and communications, in the sales report.
Ford trimmed its forecast for full-year industrywide sales in the U.S. to the low end of its previously announced range of 14 million to 14.5 million.
Auto experts are predicting that this will be the worst August for auto sales in 15 years. Edmunds.com is forecasting a 14% drop in sales industrywide.
Sales are expected to be slightly higher than the dreadful results in July -- which was the weakest month based on seasonally-adjusted sales since 1992.
Gasoline prices declined throughout August, falling about 10% from the record $4.114 set on July 17. But continued job losses and home price declines, coupled with low consumer confidence, kept many potential car and light truck buyers on the sidelines.
In response to the weak sales and outlook, Ford announced Wednesday that it would cut second-half production plans by about 5%, trimming 20,000 vehicles in the third quarter and 30,000 vehicles in the fourth quarter
Other major automakers, including General Motors (GM, Fortune 500), Toyota (TM) and Chrysler LLC are also expected to report a drop in sales from year-earlier levels later Wednesday. Honda Motor (HMC) is forecast to benefit from a shift in buyers' preference for more fuel efficient vehicles by reporting a gain in sales
Since a browser is the linchpin of Web activity — the framework for our searching, reading, buying, banking and porn consumption — this is huge step that needed to wait until Google had come of age. Chrome is an explicit attempt to accelerate the movement of computing off the desktop and into the cloud — where Google holds advantage.
By Matthew Mosk ST. PAUL -- In addition to being a mayor and raising four children, Sarah Palin found time for another venture in her Wasilla years -- she was part-owner of an Anchorage car wash.
Palin and husband Todd each held a 20 percent stake in Anchorage Car Wash LLC, according to state corporation records filed in 2004.
A review of Palin's gubernatorial disclosure filings indicates that she failed to report her stake in the company on the form that requires candidates for governor to disclose any interest in a nonpublicly traded company.
The car wash venture was not entirely smooth sailing. State records show the business ran into trouble with Alaska's division of corporations business and professional licensing after Palin became governor of the state in 2006.
A Feb. 11, 2007 letter to the governor's business partner advises that the car wash had "not filed its biennial report and/or paid its biennial fees," which were more than a year overdue.
On April 3, 2007, the state went further and issued a "certificate of involuntary dissolution" because of the car wash's failure to file its report and pay state licensing fees.
Palin's gubernatorial disclosure filings also reveal her involvement in another failed startup -- a marketing business which was to go by the name Rouge Cou, which evidently is a literal French translation of "red neck." On the 2005 form, Palin describes the firm as one for which she secured a license but did not conduct any business.
The only thing worse than getting a punctured tire is trying to use a flimsy scissor jack to change it. Break down on a dirt or snow-covered road and you probably have as good a shot at losing your hand as you do fixing a flat. Not so with the Titan, which may look like an exhaust-powered whoopee cushion, but can actually haul cars (even lifted rigs) up into the air on nearly any surface. Just run a hose to the exhaust of a running car, and the $120 (and up) balloon will gently raise the vehicle aloft -- and by "gently" we mean "really, really slowly." It's probably a little faster than calling AAA, but not as easy as Superjack's remote-controlled kit for lazies. If you have the patience, check out the vid after the break for six minutes of tire-changing action.
Satellite imagery used to be the exclusive domain of governments and spy agencies, but ever since Google Maps and Google Earth we can all get to see weird things! Fancy a look at Area 51? Wondered what it’s like in downtown Moscow? Or maybe you want to check out the Principality of Sealand? These are just ordinary, everyday things that millions of....
Finally, the day nobody has been waiting for, the debut of the trailer for the Lindsay Lohan movie, "Labor Pains". In it, Lindsay plays a girl who pretends to be pregnant so she can keep her job. The plot seems contrived, but keep in mind that Lindsay is a woman, and Hollywood has taught us that women are only worthy of their own movie when they’re pregnant (barren also works) or on the prowl to get a man. A woman can play professional basketball or catch a killer, but only if they’re actually a man dressed as a woman. Because in movies, as in life, men as woman are superior to women as women in every way. Don't believe me? Ever seen Tina Fey?
MUNICH — While VW-Audi has shown its U.S. interest with a brand-new plant going up in Tennessee, and Mercedes has the upper ground on all German premiums with its clear diesel initiative in North America, BMW North America's bold statement has not yet come. The company could use a big, mind-grabbing statement to bolster its profit base, and the smaller 1 Series introduction may not have the impact it is looking for in the U.S. market. Enter the idea of a four-cylinder engine for the 3 Series.
In part to counter Mercedes' recent decision to bring four-cylinder diesel engines into the North American lineup during 2010, BMW is believed to be close to committing to a four-cylinder gasoline engine strategy for the latest 3 Series (and certainly the 1 Series) in the U.S. and Canada.
In Europe, the 167-horsepower 320i is a healthy volume seller, as is the 120i, and BMW project director Oliver Friedmann tells Inside Line that such an addition to the company's North American offerings "would have a desirable effect on many fronts."
The direct-injection four-cylinder gas BMWs are, by many accounts, the best models sold by the company. And the fuel consumption numbers speak volumes.
Regarding the chance of bringing over also the company's outstanding 123d or 320d four-cylinder turbo-diesels, Friedmann and others say that North America isn't quite ready yet for four-cylinder diesel Bimmers, particularly not the 3 Series customer.
What this means to you: This is brilliant news for younger premium drivers in North America.— Matt Davis, Correspondent
Disputes over line calls used to be one of the main joys of tennis—this, after all, is John McEnroe's game. But fans rarely see players explode in rage anymore. In high-profile matches (i.e., those broadcast on TV), human umpires have largely been replaced by a machine called Hawk-Eye. The system is a kind of computerized ump that stitches together video footage from several high-speed cameras to produce a 3-D simulation of the ball as it approaches and bounces off the ground. Hawk-Eye's decisions are final: When a player challenges an umpire's call, the system displays its view of what just happened, then displays a judgment on the screen—in or out—that the human umpires are compelled to accept.
Hawk-Eye represents one extreme in the growing adoption of technology to solve disputes in sports. On the other side, you've got Major League Baseball, which has long resisted any kind of instant-replay system. Last week, pro baseball played its first games under a new rule that lets umpires review video in the limited scenario of "boundary calls"—essentially determining whether a home run was really a home run. (The replay system is so limited that in the week it's been active, it hasn't been deployed once.) Unlike tennis, which has made Hawk-Eye the ultimate authority, MLB, the NFL, the NBA, and the NHL all give human officials the final say in interpreting instant-replay footage.
Even so, instant replay alters how fans and players approach the game. Baseball officials have vowed not to expand the current replay system, but that will be a difficult promise to keep. If video can help an ump determine whether a ball went over the fence, why can't it help with every other call a baseball umpire has to make? That's the lure of video—it promises a measure of certainty in an otherwise uncertain endeavor. Place enough high-speed, high-resolution cameras at enough points around the field of play and you'll eventually get at the absolute truth of any play, the thinking goes. The trouble is, technology can introduce as much uncertainty as it solves.
For one thing, photography doesn't give clear-cut answers. From one angle, a ball may look in, while from another it looks out. Sure, umpires can decide which replay is most reflective of what actually happened. But umpires are biased—studies show that officials tend to favor certain players and teams based on race, jersey colors, and the size of the home crowd. Two umpires can look at the same instant replay and see different things. The whole point of going to replay was to move away from umps' screw-ups. Computers, on the other hand, are free of hate and idiosyncrasies. So why don't we move to the tennis model, letting a computer be the ultimate decision-maker?
Sure, I'm making a slippery-slope argument, and it may seem far-fetched to think that baseball or any other team sport will let machines analyze, rather than just record, what happens on the field. But you can't dismiss the slippery slope when some sports have already slid down: Tennis adopted Hawk-Eye after several high-profile matches were marred by bad calls. Hawk-Eye is installed at the U.S. Open's two stadium courts, as well as at Wimbledon, the Australian Open, and other major tournaments. (It's not necessary at the French Open because the ball leaves a visible mark on the red clay.) Since 2006, there have been more than 550 Hawk-Eye challenges at the U.S. Open, and 30 percent resulted in reversed calls. Players have occasionally questioned its decisions, but lately many have been agitating for Hawk-Eye to be used more widely. Roger Federer said recently that his biggest complaint about Hawk-Eye is that it isn't installed everywhere. Fans, too, seem to enjoy the challenge system—the crowds at the U.S. Open watch the replays intently and regularly cheer the results.
The most fascinating thing about Hawk-Eye is that it's perceived as such a success despite being demonstrably fallible. According to a fascinating paper by Harry Collins and Robert Evans of Cardiff University, the system's manufacturer reports its average error as 3.6 millimeters. The International Tennis Federation, which tests the line-calling equipment, allows for Hawk-Eye to be off by as much as 10 millimeters in some situations. This means that if a ball lands nine millimeters out, Hawk-Eye might call it in by one millimeter.
It isn't terrible that Hawk-Eye is sometimes wrong—after all, humans often make mistakes. What is odd, though, is that the system's designer, Hawk-Eye Innovations, has never explained these failures or how the system arrives at its decisions. Hawk-Eye uses up to six cameras placed around the court, but the graphic that it shows to judges and to viewers on TV does not include actual footage from any of those cameras. Instead, the system creates a composite of what it thinks happened to the ball. Collins and Evans argue that these composites subtly trick viewers. The simulation takes on an air of reality, even infallibility, when in fact it is only a statistical estimate. At the very least, the researchers say, Hawk-Eye should report its confidence—that it is X percent sure of its ruling. They also push for a more general "health warning": When CBS broadcasts Hawk-Eye simulations on TV, it should remind viewers: "This is only a virtual representation of reality. It's not what actually happened."
Those who call for increased use of instant replay in sports often point to major mistakes by umps. Every sport has its signal event, the blown call that proves that refs would do better with video backup. In baseball, it's Game 1 of the 1996 American League Championship Series between the Yankees and the Orioles. In the bottom of the eighth with the Yankees trailing, Derek Jeter hit a fly ball to right field. Richie Garcia, the right-field ump, watched Baltimore outfielder Tony Tarasco leap to make the catch. When Tarasco missed the ball, Garcia thought it was clear that the ball had gone over the fence—if it wasn't in Tarasco's glove, where else could it be? But everyone at home saw something else on that play: A 12-year-old kid named Jeffrey Maier had reached over the fence with his glove and deflected the ball into the stands. Garcia watched the replay after the game—which the Yankees went on to win—and was shocked at the sight of the kid. "Where did he come from?" Garcia said later. "I didn't see him standing there. I never saw that."
The replay system that baseball just installed probably would've gotten that call right. But why stop there? As instant replay becomes a generally accepted part of the game, players and fans are sure to press for more reviews. A system of sensors and cameras could conceivably be used to decide whether a runner is safe at first, for instance. Given that a blown call at first base once decided the World Series, you can imagine that fans might soon be calling for software to make those calls, too.
Stray too far beyond that simply case, though, and it's difficult to imagine software taking over. Tennis—with its two players, small field of play, and bright-line demarcation between balls that are in and balls that are out—is a comparatively easy sport for computers to umpire. In other sports, refs have to take into account many more variables before making a call. To be able to tell whether a football runner is down before he fumbled, for example, a computer would have to somehow keep track of every player, which one has the ball, when the player with the ball gets hit, and when and how the ball comes loose. That task would likely require an array of sensors and sophisticated image-processing techniques—probably not yet a possibility.
Beyond the technological obstacles, the age of Hawk-Eye presents a larger philosophical problem. Sometimes the computer makes a call that no human—not the fans, not the umps, not the players—can quite understand. Late in the 2007 Wimbledon final between Rafael Nadal and Roger Federer, Nadal hit a deep ball that Federer let go, thinking it was out. The umpire thought so, too, and TV replays showing the ball from Federer's side seemed to confirm it—the ball looked a good half-inch out. But when Nadal challenged the call, Hawk-Eye called the ball in. On the Hawk-Eye Innovations Web site, the company's representatives posted an explanation (PDF) that blames the dispute on the limited perceptive capacities of TV cameras and human eyeballs. When a tennis ball smashes into grass at high speeds, it compresses, skids for 10 centimeters or so, and then takes off, the company said. Hawk-Eye's fast cameras were sensitive enough to see the ball just clip the base line, while TV cameras and viewers caught only a blur while the ball skidded away from the line, making them think the ball was out.
Got that, then? Because it's so perceptive, Hawk-Eye makes obsolete every assessment tool that humans have ever used to adjudicate sports disputes: our eyes, our TV cameras, even perceptible marks on the ground. In their paper, Collins and Evans argue that this is too precise. By erasing all of tennis' ties to human perception, Hawk-Eye renders the game interpretable only to computers. That's fairly ridiculous: After all, computers aren't paying to see two human beings hit a ball over a net. People are.
Vanity Fair has unveiled its annual list of the world's 100 most powerful and influential people, what the magazine calls "the New Establishment", and topping the table for the first time is Vladimir Putin, according to reports.
Vanity Fair has named Vladimir Putin as the world's most influential personPhoto: REUTERS
7 World Trade Center almost disappears. (Photo: David W. Dunlap/The New York Times) Enlarge Image
“Transparency” is the architectural watchword of the era, almost guaranteed to appear in any reference to contemporary glass-clad towers.
But real buildings usually look a lot different than the clear plastic models and crystalline renderings shown at news conferences and ribbon cuttings.
Once in a while, however, when the light and the angles are just right, a skyscraper can come close to vanishing.
That happened last Thursday, when the 52 floors of 7 World Trade Center faded into the cloud-flecked blue of a late summer afternoon. Its masonry neighbors (140 West Street and 90 West Street) stood out in contrast.
The unique moment was captured by a photographer at the Oltremare Aquarium at Riccione in Italy.
Normally after a year-long pregnancy, captive dolphins give birth at night and away from the public gaze.
But this Bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) unusually gave birth in broad daylight and close to a viewing window so that photographer Leandro Stanzani had a grandstand view.
The calf emerged tail first - so it does not breathe in water - and was able to see and swim immediately.
The calf began feeding very quickly taking in the vital colostrum which allows it to build up its immune system.
Stanzani said he had witnessed 11 dolphin births since 1993 but these were the best images he had ever obtained.
"Taking good pictures is not easy because births often happen at night and away from the windows or sometimes the water quality is poor.
"This time I was very lucky: it happened during daylight and although there were photographers positioned at each of the three underwater windows, I was the only one to see it," he said.
A new-born calf can be more than four-feet long and weigh more than three stones.
It will be nursed for about 18 months and will begin eating fish at about four months.
The bottlenose is probably the most common of the 45 different types of dolphins and in the wild will live for an average 20 years though they have been known to live as long as 48 years.
Because the baby was born in captivity it is unlikely ever to be released into the wild and will become part of a captive breeding programme run by the European Association of Zoos and Aquaria.
As the head of a company that sells used consumer electronics, David Chen follows sales of the iPhone with the precision of a mathematician. At the outset, the price of the first version of Apple's (AAPL) music-playing wireless device behaved as expected: When the newer iPhone 3G hit store shelves, demand for the earlier iteration plummeted. Then the unexpected happened.
Within days of the iPhone 3G launch, demand for used, older iPhone models began rising, and prices began a steady climb. "We've been raising our prices over the past few weeks," says Chen, who runs NextWorth.com, a Web site that buys and resells used iPhones and iPods. "It's an anomaly, but there's still a lot of demand for the first-generation [device]." As of Aug. 26, NextWorth Solutions was paying $200 and $300 respectively for gently-used, 8-Gigabyte and 16-GB original iPhone models. That's up $50 from what his company paid a month earlier—and at the high end, on par with the price of a new 16-GB version of iPhone 3G—for the latest iteration of the iPhone, with more features and faster download speeds.
The used devices fetch an even higher price, of course, when they're sold to a consumer. On e-commerce site eBay (EBAY), where NextWorth peddles many of its wares, a 16-GB version of the first-generation iPhone goes for about $600, and an 8-GB model in good condition commands $500. When it was new, the 16-GB phone sold for $499; the 8-GB model went for $399. Today, AT&T's (T) most expensive iPhone 3G model sells for $300 with a two-year service contract. "The old iPhone [in mint condition] is very hard to find," says Shawn Zade, who sells mobile phones through New York-based WirelessImports.com. "There's a lot of demand."
Bustling Competition
Why pay a premium for an older, less advanced model? Some users simply don't want to be tied to a long-term contract with AT&T, the only authorized iPhone carrier in the U.S. The old phones can be unlocked fairly easily, making it possible for people to choose another carrier or to simply use the device with no charge at Wi-Fi hot spots. A method to reliably unlock the iPhone 3G still hasn't been found, Zade says.
Owning the old model also helps users avoid the connectivity glitches (BusinessWeek.com, 8/14/08) that recently forced Apple to push a software update for its phone. Some folks just don't do much comparison shopping, says Lidija Polutnik, a macroeconomics professor at Babson College, who also is an advisor to NextWorth. "When you go into the used gadget market, there's a lot of impulse buying," Polutnik says.
Whatever the reason, sales of the old iPhone are booming, and plenty of other companies besides NextWorth want in on the resale action. Many are striking trade-in agreements with retail stores like Circuit City (CC) to accept old iPhones on the spot. Some have powerful backers: One of NextWorth's board members is Stephen Spinelli, Philadelphia University's president and a co-founder of oil-service chain Jiffy Lube.
Even an Eco Pitch
Others are using complex problem-solving algorithms to make sure they can respond to swings in demand for the device and set prices accordingly. Flipswap uses a formula that adjusts prices in real time, based on sales data from the company's worldwide network of stores and buyers. NextWorth relies on an algorithm developed by MBA students and Polutnik at Babson College. The algorithm uses data such as an iPhone's storage capacity and extent of wear, as well as traffic to NextWorth's site and partner stores, to spit out the going price for your model right on the site's online calculator.
Some startups are relying on more than money to bring in sellers. Trade2save, due to launch in September, will not only pay for your old iPhone but also give you "carbon points" that can be used to buy other used products from the site, such as other phones. "When a customer trades in their iPhone, someone else will buy it instead of buying new," Trade2save CEO Chris Whittome writes in an e-mail. "Hence they will be saving money, and saving on the environment because they reduce the demand on manufacturing another unit."
The appeal of a used phone may be especially high outside the U.S. American consumers favor new gadgets, but overseas buyers are less averse to used phones. Flipswap, for instance, sends all of its iPhones to dealers in South America. "For a used phone, there's not as much stigma in South America as in the U.S.," says Flipswap CEO Sohrob Farudi. "They don't worry about its being used."
If enough consumers opt for used rather than new devices, Apple CEO "Steve Jobs [may have] a big problem," Whittome of Trade2save adds. Well, yes and no. Apple refreshes its product lineup on a regular basis, giving consumers a growing list of alternatives to dated devices that in any case won't remain gently used forever.
Farudi and his peers are enjoying the boom, however long it lasts. "When the iPhone 3G came out, we've continued to grow," he says. "It's been very good for our business."
Kharif is a senior writer for BusinessWeek.com in Portland, Ore.
.
All you art collectors out there. Here is a chance to get a Giclee copy of some of Ian M Sherwin work. Ian is planning on doing a whole series of Marblehead, Massachusetts paintings. His work is amazing.
.
Posts
